LucidDreamer Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Well, If you believe that the information in that chart is really an accurate representation of the IQ's of each state then a correlation is hard to deny. The questions are whether that chart is accurate and what is the significance if it is. Oh and now I want to move to Connecticut. Scratch that; I'll move to Mississippi and be a super-genius.
Perennial Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 How did it go ... if you wealthy, old, and go to church real often (and have some redness in your neck area might add) you voted for Bush ? Its funny how educated people, who quite often happen to be the smarter of the bunch, go for the liberal side of things ... something for the US masses to think about.
budullewraagh Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 i have to agree with luciddreamer on this one. if those are the actual iq averages, there is no denying it.
Tetrahedrite Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Just as we suspected!! Is anyone surprised that Texas is down there at number 40?
Lance Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 And of course the same people who voted 2004 took the test...?
Tetrahedrite Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 And of course the same people who voted 2004 took the test...? Does it matter? It is an average, on average people who voted for Bush had a lower IQ!
Lance Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Does it matter? It is an average, on average people who voted for Bush had a lower IQ! Thats not true. The people who took the test were not the same people who voted. Youre trying to compare two different sets of people.
LucidDreamer Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 That's a good point. Only half the population votes and who knows how old those statistics are. They may have got them from the school tests. Much of the validity of this correlation lies on the how’s and when’s of those IQ scores. But what does this really tell us anyway? We already knew the East Coast and West Coast states were more educated than the south. A good portion of the people in those southern states that scored poorly on those IQ tests were probably very poor people who didn't even vote or voted Democratic. But I bet a sizable portion of the low scores came from small extremely religious rural areas, which voted Republican.
Aardvark Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 The information can not be correct. How would it be possible for the average intelligence of all the millions of people in a state be lower than another state? Unless the inhabitants of different states were seriously genetically different it is not possible. This just goes to show the limitations of IQ tests.
LucidDreamer Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 True. It mostly has to due with education. Mississippi is also one of the poorest if not the poorest state.
Aardvark Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Hope you do well in Mississippi as a super genius. It just goes to show that IQ tests don't really work, and maybe the Republicans should do more to screw up the education system and so get even more votes.
budullewraagh Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 the iq test is a better sign of intelligence than any other test we have including the sat and act
LucidDreamer Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Your probably right. It's just that no pen and paper 30-60 min test can accurately quantify something as complex as intelligence. I don't think the 15 pt difference between Mississippi's average IQ and the normal means that Mississippi is full of retarded people (inbreeding jokes aside). I think the difference is mostly due to poor education and not an actual genetic deficiency. But of course it still means they are not as mentally adapt in some respects, regardless of the cause.
Tetrahedrite Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 We already knew the East Coast and West Coast states were more educated than the south. A good portion of the people in those southern states that scored poorly on those IQ tests were probably very poor people who didn't even vote or voted Democratic. But I bet a sizable portion of the low scores came from small extremely religious rural areas, which voted Republican. Being poor, religious, or uneducated has does not affect your Intelligence Quotient (IQ)
jgerlica Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Why do we even bring education into this? A standard IQ test really only measures problem solving ability. Education has nothing to do with the ability to reason out a pattern from a random group of numbers, shapes, etc. As with any other statistics, I'll have to take this with a grain of salt. The chances of manipulation and outright bias are just too great.
LucidDreamer Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Being poor, religious, or uneducated has does not affect your Intelligence Quotient (IQ) People in rural, religious communities in the United States are generally less educated than people living in a rich suburb. Education does affect intelligence. Psychometric psychologists insist that IQ is independent of education but this is not true. For those of you that do not believe that IQ is affected by education I have a question. How is it then possible that IQ scores have been steadily raising at a rate of 3-6 points per decade? Is it that we are better educated or that we have evolved a 40% increase in our intelligence over the last 70 years? http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v4n20.html http://www.increasingintelligence.com/envir.html
jgerlica Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Yet the standard IQ tests do not measure this, that is why we have child genius, and aged simpletons.
jgerlica Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 People in rural' date=' religious communities in the United States are generally less educated than people living in a rich suburb. Education [b']does[/b] affect intelligence. Psychometric physiologists insist that IQ is independent of education but this is not true. So taking that same tack; would you be willing to say George Bush is of above average intelligence? After all, he had the finest education money can buy.
Tetrahedrite Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Education does affect intelligence. No it doesn't....intelligence affects education, not the other way around
LucidDreamer Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 For those of you that do not believe that IQ is affected by education I have a question. How is it then possible that IQ scores have been steadily raising at a rate of 3-6 points per decade? Is it that we are better educated or that we have evolved a 40% increase in our intelligence over the last 70 years?
LucidDreamer Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Yet the standard IQ tests do not measure this, that is why we have child genius, Children can answer fewer correct answers to score that same IQ as an adult. and aged simpletons. Some adults acquire an amazing amount of problem solving skills as they age. These skills do not, however, translate into scoring higher on an IQ test. This signifies that an IQ test does not accurately measure the intellectual abilities that we actually use in life. It does not mean that your intelligence does not change as you age. If that adult had been practicing IQ tests for 15 years instead of something useful he would score very highly. Everyone's brain will begin to deteriorate with age eventually and you cannot improve on physiological limitations (disregarding pharmacology and genetic engineering). Mental speed is especially affected by genetics. However, you can acquire an amazing amount of mental tools in your toolbox as you age. This does improve your intelligence. Facts and figures are not the only kind of knowledge.
SubJunk Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 For one thing, your score on an IQ test doesn't determine how smart you are. It determines how good you are at taking IQ tests, which are mainly comprised of logic answers. Secondly, have you ever thought that in the places with lower recorded IQs the smart people are so smart that they see that the above point is right?
jgerlica Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Let us settle one thing here if nothing else. IQ is not a measurement of practical knowledge garnered from our wonderful educational system, it is a way of quantifying an individual's ability to assimilate the information presented them. Which brings me back to the point of child genius, if intelligence were based upon education, this would not be possible. It is highly unlikely that a five year old will score a 36 on the ACT, but that is a test of knowledge not intelligence, moreover it is quite possible that the same child may score above 140 when presented with an IQ test. How could that be you ask? Well could it be that an individuals ABILITY TO LEARN is in no way influenced by such factors as age, wealth, geographic location, or political affiliation?
Skye Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Can a correlation be made? Yes, but not causation. Clearly voting patterns have more involved than problem solving ability.
Recommended Posts